Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Rohan Sukumaran

dblp:280/0377 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Efficient and distributed learning · 67% Trustworthy machine learning · 33%
Network and information security
1 paper
Privacy and data protection · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
0.812024
Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse Models · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression
0.812024
Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse Models · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
pruning
0.812024
Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse Models · ICLR 2024
Privacy and data protection
inference attack
0.812024
SIMBA: Split Inference - Mechanisms, Benchmarks and Attacks · ECCV (76) 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

split inference · 0.8model pruning · 0.8constrained optimization · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 SIMBA: Split Inference - Mechanisms, Benchmarks and Attacks
Abhishek Singh 0005, Vivek Sharma 0001, Rohan Sukumaran, John Mose, Jeffrey Chiu, Justin Yu, Ramesh Raskar
ECCV (76)3
2024 Balancing Act: Constraining Disparate Impact in Sparse Models
abstract
Model pruning is a popular approach to enable the deployment of large deep learning models on edge devices with restricted computational or storage capacities. Although sparse models achieve performance comparable to that of their dense counterparts at the level of the entire dataset, they exhibit high accuracy drops for some data sub-groups. Existing methods to mitigate this disparate impact induced by pruning (i) rely on surrogate metrics that address the problem indirectly and have limited interpretability; or (ii) scale poorly with the number of protected sub-groups in terms of computational cost. We propose a constrained optimization approach that _directly addresses the disparate impact of pruning_: our formulation bounds the accuracy change between the dense and sparse models, for each sub-group. This choice of constraints provides an interpretable success criterion to determine if a pruned model achieves acceptable disparity levels. Experimental results demonstrate that our technique scales reliably to problems involving large models and hundreds of protected sub-groups.
Meraj Hashemizadeh, Juan Ramirez, Rohan Sukumaran, Golnoosh Farnadi, Simon Lacoste-Julien, Jose Gallego-Posada
ICLR3